Clinical Relevance The strength of some bioactive materials can be compromised by cariogenic challenges. This may impact the clinical longevity of restorations, especially in stress-bearing areas. SUMMARY This study determined the mechanical performance of bioactive restoratives in cariogenic environments and compared the flexural properties of various bioactive materials. The materials evaluated included a conventional resin-based composite (Filtek Z350 [FZ]) and 3 bioactive restoratives, namely an alkasite (Cention N [CN]), a giomer (Beautifil-bulk Restorative [BB]), and an enhanced resin-modified glass ionomer (Activa Bioactive Restorative [AV]). Beam-shaped specimens (12 x 2 x 2 mm) were produced, randomly allocated to 4 groups (n=10), and conditioned in deionized solution, remineralizing solution, demineralizing solution (DE), or pH cycled for 14 days at 37°C. After conditioning/pH cycling, the specimens were subjected to 3-point flexural testing. Flexural data were subjected to statistical analysis using analysis of variance or Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Mean flexural modulus and strength ranged from 3.54 ± 0.33 to 7.44 ± 0.28 GPa, and 87.07 ± 8.99 to 123.54 ± 12.37 MPa, respectively. While the flexural modulus of the bioactive restoratives was not affected by cariogenic/acidic conditions, flexural strength usually decreased, with the exception of CN. The strength of BB was significantly reduced by DE and pH cycling, while that of AV was lowered by DE. For all conditioning mediums, AV had a significantly lower modulus than the other materials. Apart from conditioning in DE, where differences in flexural strength was insignificant, FZ and AV were generally significantly stronger than BB and CN. The effect of cariogenic environments on flexural strength was found to be material dependent, and aside from the alkasite material (CN), cariogenic conditions were observed to significantly decrease the strength of bioactive restoratives.

SUMMARY This study compared the viscoelastic properties of restorative and flowable bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) with their conventional counterparts and evaluated the impact of aqueous solutions on viscoelastic properties. The materials examined included three conventional RBCs (Filtek Z350, Tetric N Ceram, and Beautifil II), three restorative bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Restorative, Tetric N Ceram Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-Fill Restorative) in addition to three flowable bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable, Tetric N Flow Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-Fill Flowable). Beam-shaped specimens (12×2×2 mm) were fabricated using customized stainless-steel molds, finished, and measured. The specimens were randomly divided into four groups and conditioned in air (control), artificial saliva, 0.02 N citric acid, and 50% ethanol-water solution for seven days at 37°C. They were then subjected to dynamic mechanical analysis (n = 10) in flexure mode at 37°C with a frequency of 0.1 to 10 Hz. Storage modulus, loss modulus, and loss tangent data were subjected to statistical analysis using one-way analysis of variance/Tukey post hoc test at a significance level of α = 0.05. Viscoelastic properties of the RBCs were found to be product and conditioning medium dependent. For most RBCs, exposure to aqueous solutions, particularly an ethanol-water solution, degraded viscoelastic properties. With the exception of Filtek Bulk-Fill Restorative, bulk-fill restorative and flowable RBCs generally had significantly lower storage and loss modulus than their conventional counterparts regardless of conditioning medium. Conventional RBCs are thus favored over their bulk-fill counterparts, particularly for high-stress-bearing areas.

Clinical Relevance Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) composite resins are susceptible to degradation by dietary solvents. Dietary counselling is prudent when placing such CAD/CAM restorations. SUMMARY This study determined the effect of dietary solvents on the surface roughness (Ra) of direct, indirect, and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) dental composites. The materials evaluated were a direct composite (Filtek Z350 XT [FZ]), an indirect composite (Shofu Ceramage [CM]), and four CAD/CAM composites (Lava Ultimate [LU], Shofu Block HC [HC], Cerasmart [CS], and Vita Enamic [VE]). Specimens (12×14×1.5 mm) of each material were prepared, measured for baseline Ra, ranked, divided into six groups (n=12), and conditioned in the following media for 1 week at 37°C: air (control), distilled water, 0.02 N citric acid, 0.02 N lactic acid, heptane, and 50% ethanol-water solution. The composite specimens were then subjected to postconditioning Ra testing using an optical three-dimensional surface analyzer (G4e, Alicona Imaging GmbH, Raaba, Austria). Inter-medium and inter-material comparisons were performed with one-way analysis of variance and post hoc Bonferroni test at a significance level of α =0.05. Mean Ra values ranged from 0.086 ± 0.004 μm to 0.153 ± 0.005 μm for the various material/medium combinations. For all materials, conditioning in air (control) and distilled water generally resulted in significantly lower mean Ra than exposure to other dietary solvents. Conditioning in citric acid presented the roughest surfaces for FZ, CM, and CS. For LU, HC, and VE, exposure to lactic acid, heptane, and ethanol solution resulted in the highest mean Ra. Regardless of conditioning media, FZ had the highest and VE the lowest mean Ra compared with other composites. The CAD/CAM composites remained susceptible to surface degradation by dietary solvents despite their industrial polymerization.

SUMMARY The objectives of the study were to compare the flexural modulus and strength of restorative and flowable bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) to their conventional counterparts and to determine the effects of conditioning environment on their flexural properties. The materials evaluated included three conventional RBCs (Filtek Z350, Tetric N Ceram, and Beautifil II), three restorative bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Restorative, Tetric N Ceram Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-fill Restorative), as well as three flowable bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable, Tetric N Flow Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-Fill Flowable). Specimens were fabricated using customized stainless-steel molds, finished, measured, and randomly divided into four groups. The various RBCs were conditioned in the following mediums (n=10) for seven days at 37°C: air, artificial saliva (SAGF), 0.02 N citric acid, and 50% ethanol-water solution. After conditioning, the specimens were rinsed, blotted dry, measured, and subjected to flexural testing using a universal testing machine. Data were subjected to statistical analysis using analysis of variance and the Tukey test at a significance level of α = 0.05. Significant differences in flexural properties were observed between materials and conditioning mediums. Bulk-fill restorative RBCs exhibited higher flexural modulus than their bulk-fill flowable and conventional counterparts. With the exception of Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable, bulk-fill flowable RBCs had significantly higher flexural strength than bulk-fill restorative and conventional RBCs. Flexural properties were highest when RBCs were conditioned in air and generally the lowest after exposure to ethanol.

SUMMARY The objective of this study was to determine the influence of specimen dimension and conditioning medium on the dynamic and static flexural properties of resin-based composites (RBCs). One conventional (Filtek Z350) and two bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-fill and Beautifil-Bulk Restorative) were evaluated. Bar-shaped specimens with dimensions 25 × 2 × 2 mm (ISO flexural [IFT]) or 12 × 2 × 2 mm (mini-flexural [MFT]) were fabricated using customized stainless-steel molds, finished, measured, randomly divided into two groups, and conditioned in air or artificial saliva (SAGF) for seven days at 37°C. The specimens (n=10) were then subjected to dynamic and static three-point flexural testing. Data for storage modulus, loss modulus, loss tangent, flexural strength, and modulus were computed and subjected to t -test, analysis of variance/Tukey test, and Pearson correlation at a significance level of α = 0.05. For both IFT and MFT, significant differences in dynamic and static flexural properties were more prevalent between materials after storage in saliva. For both conditioning mediums, the strongest correlation between IFT and MFT was observed for flexural strength. While significant positive correlations were observed for all flexural properties with saliva, no significant correlations were detected for loss tangent and flexural modulus with air. For both IFT and MFT, storage in saliva appeared to be more discriminative than storage in air. As moderate to strong positive relationships exist between IFT and MFT for dynamic and static flexural properties, the mini-flexural test holds promise as a replacement for the ISO 4049 in view of its clinical relevance and greater efficiency.

SUMMARY This study investigated the viscoelastic properties of contemporary bulk-fill restoratives in distilled water and artificial saliva using dynamic mechanical analysis. The materials evaluated included a conventional composite (Filtek Z350), two bulk-fill composites (Filtek Bulk-fill and Tetric N Ceram), a bulk-fill giomer (Beautifil-Bulk Restorative), and two novel reinforced glass ionomer cements (Zirconomer [ZR] and Equia Forte [EQ]). The glass ionomer materials were also assessed with and without resin coating (Equia Forte Coat). Test specimens 12 × 2 × 2 mm of the various materials were fabricated using customized stainless-steel molds. After light polymerization/initial set, the specimens were removed from the molds, finished, measured, and conditioned in distilled water or artificial saliva at 37°C for seven days. The materials (n=10) were then subjected to dynamic mechanical testing in flexure mode at 37°C and a frequency of 0.1 to 10 Hz. Storage modulus, loss modulus, and loss tangent data were subjected to normality testing and statistical analysis using one-way analysis of variance/Dunnett's test and t -test at a significance level of p < 0.05. Mean storage modulus ranged from 3.16 ± 0.25 to 8.98 ± 0.44 GPa, while mean loss modulus ranged from 0.24 ± 0.03 to 0.65 ± 0.12 GPa for distilled water and artificial saliva. Values for loss tangent ranged from 45.7 ± 7.33 to 134.2 ± 12.36 (10 −3 ). Significant differences in storage/loss modulus and loss tangent were observed between the various bulk-fill restoratives and two conditioning mediums. Storage modulus was significantly improved when EQ and ZR was not coated with resin.